Vertical distance from top of bank to creek

[amashilu]

Question: Do we know how far down (from the top of the bank) the creek is, in this photo?
And, harder to guess, what would be the lesser height, after taking away an imagined amount of snow that built up after February 2 and until the bodies were found, what would that height be?

[GlennM]

I wish the photo was enhanced. Perhaps there would be some reference object in a sharpened and contrast corrected image.

[Олег Таймень]

On the bank illuminated by the sun, the snow has already completely melted. On the bank where the snow has not yet melted, we see snow. When snow melts, it becomes denser and its level drops.

[Axelrod]

I want to say that the ravine there is as high as a man, which is very small.
In our area, ravines are as deep as a 3- or 5-story building.

Most likely, there was a shift of a snow layer or snow slab (Russian term for the Dyatlov case).
According to the definition, a "snow slab" moves down from the place of damage (like a cut chair back),
there is an empty crack there. UPPER LAYER IS NOT MOVING ON YOU!

The most understandable option is that a cave for 4 people was dug as a hole on the slope of a ravine,
which violated the integrity of the snow layer, and the snow moved 5 meters downstream of the stream.



Why did Oleg Taimen film a video of digging a cave there 2 years ago and did not end up buried in a snow grave? You should ask him. Perhaps because there was little snow in his year, or Oleg quickly left that place.

Perhaps another scenario of events took place. In the film, we see a man with a machine gun.

[Partorg]

Question: Do we know how far down (from the top of the bank) the creek is, in this photo?
And, harder to guess, what would be the lesser height, after taking away an imagined amount of snow that built up after February 2 and until the bodies were found, what would that height be?

Same cut. The white lines show the sequence of filling the ravine with snow. Line No. 1 - position on February 1st No. 2; 3 - next couple of weeks. By the beginning of March, the ravine was completely covered with snow

[Partorg]

[WAB]

Question: Do we know how far down (from the top of the bank) the creek is, in this photo?
And, harder to guess, what would be the lesser height, after taking away an imagined amount of snow that built up after February 2 and until the bodies were found, what would that height be?

Dear Partorg !
Please do not misinform the readers of this forum... Even further, as this forum is not only read by its regular readers.

1. All these schemes are made exclusively only by Shura (Alexander Alekseekov). The top two are his measurements in the summer, although made with some error. Approximately +/- 30...50 cm (1,2...2 ft). But it doesn't really matter...
The lower scheme, in my humble opinion, has large inaccuracies in snow deposition. If you have a good understanding of aerodynamics and snow deposition, it doesn't happen that way in those very conditions.  There are no winds there where cornice formation is possible. Only the lowest white line is realistic, except that the decking must also lie on the surface of the snow. Further snow deposition was almost equivalent to this line, only more snow was deposited on the left (in the picture) side because the wind blew from there. But a cornice at that location is a clear overreach of common sense.
Also, I must disappoint your optimism about the entire profile being filled with snow by February 1. That was only possible by mid to late April. At the beginning of the search this place was simply not paid attention to, and even 20...30 cm of snow on top of the bodies meant that they were no longer visible. It is simply impossible to walk across the ravine in this place, so there were no attempts to look for something there.
Of course, we can not talk about any “collapse of the cornice”, it is a fantasy, and anti-scientific.



Same cut. The white lines show the sequence of filling the ravine with snow. Line No. 1 - position on February 1st No. 2; 3 - next couple of weeks. By the beginning of March, the ravine was completely covered with snow

[WAB]

I make one more remark (rather it will be a clarification) on this post.

Neither Shura, nor (it will be mentioned at night) KAN, have anything to do with this scheme.
This is the work of Olga Valentinovna Vedeneeva, known under the nickname Helga.
There are some inaccuracies here too (for example, compare the length of Luda Dubinina's body with 100 cm [~3.5 ft] or 50 cm [~1.5 ft] side by side), but it doesn't matter either, as there is some clarity of the picture.

[Partorg]

Уважаемый ВАБ!
Если я всё правильно понимаю, то две первые схемы либо не содержат никакой дезинформации, либо основными дезинформаторами являетесь вы с Алексеенковым, а я тут всего лишь мелкий соучастник ))  Схема последовательности заполнения оврага снегом, (выполненная если не ошибаюсь, юзером «квн» с «Перевал 59») разумеется имеет предположительный характер, но она основана на давно известных закономерностях отложения снежных надувов, и выглядит, IMHO, вполне правдоподобно.
Для образования карниза важна не столько скорость ветра сколько перегиб обдуваемой поверхности. Идеальное условие - пологий наветренный склон и крутой (≥ 30°) подветренный.
Если наоборот или склоны симметричны - карнизы не возникают.
Подветренный, левый склон Оврага этому условию вполне отвечает
Даже сейчас, когда из-за подросшего леса, снега до оврага доходит меньше чем в 1959, на фото и видео видны достаточно крутые борта подветренных надувов.
Скорость же ветра больше влияет на плотность отложения.
Что касается времени наполнения Оврага, то во-первых, я говорил не о 1 февраля, а о начале марта. По воспоминаниям некоторых поисковиков (Сахнин, например) в марте Овраг был нивелирован снегом и 2-х метровые зонды не доставали там до дна.
Но в любом случае, это обстоятельство ни на что не влияет.

Преамбула к продольному разрезу Хельги не моя - авторская.
Я просто поленился качественно обрезать скрин

 
Dear WAB!
If I understand everything correctly, then first two schemes either do not contain any disinformation, or the main disinformers is you and Alekseenkov, and I am just a minor accomplice here.  The diagram of the sequence of filling the ravine with snow (done, if I’m not mistaken, by the user “KVN” from “Pass 59”), of course, is of a speculative nature, but it is based on long-known patterns of deposition of snow blows, and looks, IMHO, very plausible. For the formation of a cornice, it is not so much the wind speed that is important as the inflection of the blown surface. The ideal condition is a gentle windward slope and a steep (≥ 30°) leeward slope. If it is the other way around or the slopes are symmetrical, cornices do not appear. The leeward, left slope of the ravine fully meets this condition.  Even now, when less snow falls into the ravine than in 1959 due to the growing forest, the photos and videos show rather steep slopes of snowdrifts on its leeward sides.  Wind speed has a greater effect on the density of sediment.
As for the time of filling the Ravine, firstly, I was not talking about February 1, but about the beginning of March. According to the recollections of some search engines (Sakhnin, for example), in March the ravine was leveled with snow and 2-meter probes did not reach the bottom there. But in any case, this circumstance does not affect anything.

The preamble to the longitudinal section of Helga is not mine - the author's. I was just too lazy to crop the screen properly

[Ziljoe]

It is difficult to know the exact nature of the snow level in the ravine at the time of the incident but we can conclude that snow can completely fill the ravine . There is zero argument there .

I don't think it would have been empty when the searchers arrived at the scene , the bodies would have been visible in the stream bed to any searcher passing by as the water, if still flowing, would leave parts of the bodies exposed.

There is no reason not to assume that the ravine was mostly filled up or at least had steep sides of snow. Many later research videos show banks of snow touching or covering the ravine , all be it at different amounts.

I also don't think it would have filled up through April as the thaw is happening and it's this thaw that catches the Mansi attention to cut trees and debris of sticks and clothes that show a path of activity towards the den location. However, I have no explanation to how that much snow got on top of the den if it wasn't dug as a cave or snow hole.

If the snow was less when the Mansi first arrived at the end of February, how did they miss all the cut trees and debris? .

Anyway, this discussion has provoked my thinking. The biggest violence to any of the bodies are the ravine 4, they have the most trauma. It might be logical to assume this is the epicenter of all activity in the forest , at least a mental exercise.

With the extent of the broken ribs , I don't think anyone would be moving them, it is most likely that how ever these injuries were sustained, it was in/at the ravine. I suppose we could put forward an argument that the den was built to triage the injured , the den was not built in the ravine for convenience but because this is where the injuries had occurred . To put it into another perspective, the ravine 4 never moved from the den by water flow or later snow movement, they were just never moved to the den flooring by the others after receiving their injuries.

It is interesting that the den flooring doesn't even seem big enough for even 4 people and definitely not 9 . Perhaps the construction of the flooring was never finished as intended.

I have a gut feeling that the Yuri's were, or perhaps , got wet trying to move or help the ravine 4.  The fire and retrieving the branches at the ceder seems a final attempt to survive , a last throw of the dice perhaps ?.

The Yuri's are laid to the side of the fire and the last three sit in the den or move to regain the resources at the tent.

[WAB]

Dear WAB!
If I understand everything correctly, then first two schemes either do not contain any disinformation, or the main disinformers is you and Alekseenkov, and I am just a minor accomplice here.

Dear Par torg !
You have an amazing ability to understand everything not as it really is, but as you yourself have invented....
And with complete unwillingness to find out what is wrong. Usually, decent people figure it out before throwing accusations....
I was replying to both of your posts at once, and I forgot that you can't do that on this forum. I had to split the posts, and since I have very little time for all this writing, I left it at that.

Therefore, my rejoinder about misinformation was made, mainly about the caption to the very bottom picture. And don't make excuses that it was someone else who misinformed, if you use information, you should be responsible for it yourself.

Now about the rest of the pictures. Shura did it all completely, quite competently, except for snow deposition. I have my own measurements and analysis, but if Shura published something worthy, why do I need to repeat myself?
On snow deposition, he and I have serious disagreements. We graduated from the same university, only Shura is a radio engineer and I am an airplane engineer, so I know such things as aerodynamics as well as he does.

The diagram of the sequence of filling the ravine with snow (done, if I’m not mistaken, by the user “KVN” from “Pass 59”), of course, is of a speculative nature, but it is based on long-known patterns of deposition of snow blows, and looks, IMHO, very plausible.

1. Vladimir Nikolayevich has nothing to do with it.
2. Please share information: who is the author of this multi-year research? And where can I read the results of these studies? I don't need to refer to Shura, I know what he did and how he did it, that's why I write that it may “look plausible”, but not as it happens in practice.

For the formation of a cornice, it is not so much the wind speed that is important as the inflection of the blown surface. The ideal condition is a gentle windward slope and a steep (≥ 30°) leeward slope. If it is the other way around or the slopes are symmetrical, cornices do not appear.

I am extremely grateful to you for this unnecessary лекбез (lecture), but you shouldn't say platitudes as well as misinformation about 30 degrees. There's no such thing as “degrees.” Besides, you need a sharp bend for a cornice, and the slope there is a smooth curve.
If you have not seen this place yourself, then do not show your illiteracy in understanding the conditions.

The leeward, left slope of the ravine fully meets this condition.

It doesn't. See text above.

Even now, when less snow falls into the ravine than in 1959 due to the growing forest, the photos and videos show rather steep slopes of snowdrifts on its leeward sides.  Wind speed has a greater effect on the density of sediment.

Again you write something you have no idea about. We get a lot more snow now than we did in 1959 and the winters are much warmer.
I made a large comparison table for 1959 and 2010, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2019 for the surrounding area. It clearly shows that there is on average 2.5 times more snow if you compare February to February and even more if you compare February to March.
And tell me in detail what “ precipitation density” means? I don't know such a term, and neither do climate scientists.

As for the time of filling the Ravine, firstly, I was not talking about February 1, but about the beginning of March.

I was talking about the same thing, and I noticed that the channel wasn't filled in almost completely until early May....
There was considerably less snow there in March.

According to the recollections of some search engines (Sakhnin, for example), in March the ravine was leveled with snow and 2-meter probes did not reach the bottom there. But in any case, this circumstance does not affect anything.

You have a traditional way of argumentation for those who in our country are called “дятловеды” (this is our ironic and disparaging term): without naming specifically the time, place (what enemy was being talked about? I read it carefully and realized that it was the ravine of the second creek in late March), you make truly “global conclusions”. So on the second creek the valley is twice as deep and the west side is steeper. Have you observed it for a long time?
If it “doesn't affect anything,” then why bring it up as an argument?

The preamble to the longitudinal section of Helga is not mine - the author's. I was just too lazy to crop the screen properly

It's already been said, if you use someone else's information, verify its validity and be responsible for your words. The excuse is not in your favor.

[amashilu]

If bad guys threw the ravine4 over the bank into the stream below, would the height from the top of the bank down to the creek be enough to break their ribs and skulls etc. when they landed on rocks in the creek? I don't know if that would be the equivalent of a car crash at high speed.

[Ziljoe]

@ WAB and partorg.

I have great respect for you both and I shall expose my ignorance and lay myself naked  for criticism.. with both of your arguments where does the following video fit it in with what you both propose a cornice is?

With my lack of knowledge, would something  like this be possible at the ravine?

https://youtube.com/shorts/Q9Az0idgPxQ?si=cXhJ0j1r0GHOfSq0

A cornice doesn't need to be an exposed mountain top?

[Partorg]

You have an amazing ability to understand everything not as it really is, but as you yourself have invented

Dear WAB!
IMHO, it is still less surprising than the ability to make accusations of disinformation and transfer their specification to the next post, which will be written a few days later.
Once again: the authorship of the preamble to the diagram Helga with the words: “The drawing was made in accordance with the scale and exact dimensions taken from the works of KAN and Shura” belongs to Helga herself. That is why I did not consider it necessary to remove it. Do you think that Ms Helga is deliberately misinforming the public?
Or is she just sincerely mistaken?

[Partorg]

A cornice doesn't need to be an exposed mountain top?

Yes, that's how it is. This is, for example, how the Canadian reference book “Snow”, published in the USSR in 1986, presents the deposits of blizzard snow on typical obstacles.

But the respected WAB has the ability to challenge even what he sees with his own eyes, so he most likely will not recognize your picture as a worthy argument.

[GlennM]

While the gods on Olympus thunder at each other, I am inclined to think this study of snow buildup has relevance for the tent on 1079 too, yes?

[Ziljoe]

I don't know if these photos help the debate but we can see it's a small cornice in the first picture, and the second cornice is made in a flat field.

I think it's most likely possible that something like this was at the ravine, whether that ended up as a complete snow bridge over the ravine  or partly covered,  it just seems to fit best with injuries and how and why the ravine 4 came to be there.

We know the ravine can get fully covered with snow, we know the ravine 4 had high impact or crush type injuries , we know that the bodies were lying on the ground ( or close to a hard surface) and the injuries correspond to  the contact area from the hard surface to the ground.

Coincidence perhaps.

The author writes;

"A rabbit or squirrel might have trouble with the one in the photo but otherwise I think it’s pretty safe."





This was created in a flat field

[Partorg]

I am inclined to think this study of snow buildup has relevance for the tent on 1079 too, yes?

If we mean the deposition of blizzard snow on the tent, then of course the snow should have settled on the leeward slope of the roof, but it would hardly have had time to accumulate there in any significant quantity. They had just moved into the tent and haven't even started dinner yet. The sliced ​​pork loin at the exit speaks volumes about this.

[Partorg]

and the second cornice is made in a flat field

On completely level ground - unlikely. There must be something there that traps snow carried and creates a snowdrift. At least some bushes.

Here's a little of fundamental :

[Ziljoe]

and the second cornice is made in a flat field

On completely level ground - unlikely. There must be something there that traps snow carried and creates a snowdrift. At least some bushes.

Here's a little of fundamental :

I don't know if it's possible but it's what is reported in the photo caption. Perhaps there was a fence or slight raise in the ground that was enough to start the process.